Talking about the anti-Corbyn coup attempt being mounted by the Jews, Diane Abbott accurately describes it as a "smear campaign". She proves her cluelessness later on, however, by claiming that antisemitism "started in the 19th century with the Tsarist pogroms".
As I've previously pointed out, there were no "Tsarist pogroms". There is no evidence whatsoever that the Russian Tsars organised, encouraged, connived in or in any way approved of the pogroms carried out against Jews. This is a slander of the Russian royal house that the Jews have successfully perpetrated, establishing it in the minds of even not very well-educated people like the negress above.

But it's hilarious that she thinks antisemitism started in the 19th century. Antisemitism has existed for as long as the Jews have existed. And this in itself is one of the most intriguing "data points" when contemplating the whole "Jewish Question". A people has provoked antagonism in every other people it has come into contact with across thousands of years of history. There are only two ways to interpret that: there is something wrong with that people, or there is something wrong with everyone else. The Jews say there is something wrong with everyone else, a point of view they encapsulate in the word "antisemitism". And "everyone else" has uncritically accepted this manifestly absurd argument.

Incidentally, exactly the same thing is true of Muslims and "Islamophobia". We see the same systematic generation of antagonism in every other people they come into contact with, the same refusal to acknowledge fault, the same culpabilisation of all others and same description of what is mere ethnic self-defence in the other people ("antisemitism", "Islamophobia") as some kind of disease.
Here are some examples of "vintage" antisemitism.

Martin Luther, 1543, from "On the Jews and their lies":

Learn from this, dear Christian, what you are doing if you permit the blind Jews to mislead you. Then the saying will truly apply, "When a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into the pit" [cf. Luke 6:39]. You cannot learn anything from them except how to misunderstand the divine commandments...

***
Therefore be on your guard against the Jews, knowing that wherever they have their synagogues, nothing is found but a den of devils in which sheer self­glory, conceit, lies, blasphemy, and defaming of God and men are practiced most maliciously and veheming his eyes on them.

***
Moreover, they are nothing but thieves and robbers who daily eat no morsel and wear no thread of clothing which they have not stolen and pilfered from us by means of their accursed usury. Thus they live from day to day, together with wife and child, by theft and robbery, as arch­thieves and robbers, in the most impenitent security.

***
However, they have not acquired a perfect mastery of the art of lying; they lie so clumsily and ineptly that anyone who is just a little observant can easily detect it. But for us Christians they stand as a terrifying example of God's wrath.

***
If I had to refute all the other articles of the Jewish faith, I should be obliged to write against them as much and for as long a time as they have used for inventing their lies­­ that is, longer than two thousand years.

From the ancient Roman historian Tacitus, The Histories, ca. 110 AD

In order to secure the allegiance of his people in the future, Moses prescribed for them a novel religion quite different from those of the rest of mankind. Among the Jews all things are profane that we hold sacred; on the other hand they regard as permissible what seems to us immoral. In the innermost part of the Temple, they consecrated an image of the animal which had delivered them from their wandering and thirst, choosing a ram as beast of sacrifice to demonstrate, so it seems, their contempt for Hammon. The bull is also offered up, because the Egyptians worship it as Apis. They avoid eating pork in memory of their tribulations, as they themselves were once infected with the disease to which this creature is subject.note. They still fast frequently as an admission of the hunger they once endured so long, and to symbolize their hurried meal the bread eaten by the Jews is unleavened. We are told that the seventh day was set aside for rest because this marked the end of their toils. In course of time the seductions of idleness made them devote every seventh year to indolence as well. Others say that this is a mark of respect to Saturn, either because they owe the basic principles of their religion to the Idaei, who, we are told, were expelled in the company of Saturn and became the founders of the Jewish race, or because, among the seven stars that rule mankind, the one that describes the highest orbit and exerts the greatest influence is Saturn. A further argument is that most of the heavenly bodies complete their path and revolutions in multiples of seven.

Whatever their origin, these observances are sanctioned by their antiquity. The other practices of the Jews are sinister and revolting, and have entrenched themselves by their very wickedness. Wretches of the most abandoned kind who had no use for the religion of their fathers took to contributing dues and free-will offerings to swell the Jewish exchequer; and other reasons for their increasing wealth way be found in their stubborn loyalty and ready benevolence towards brother Jews. But the rest of the world they confront with the hatred reserved for enemies. They will not feed or intermarry with gentiles. Though a most lascivious people, the Jews avoid sexual intercourse with women of alien race. Among themselves nothing is barred. They have introduced the practice of circumcision to show that they are different from others. Proselytes to Jewry adopt the same practices, and the very first lesson they learn is to despise the gods, shed all feelings of patriotism, and consider parents, children and brothers as readily expendable. However, the Jews see to it that their numbers increase.

3
comments:

". And this in itself is one of the most intriguing "data points" when contemplating the whole "Jewish Question". A people has provoked antagonism in every other people it has come into contact with across thousands of years of history. There are only two ways to interpret that: there is something wrong with that people, or there is something wrong with everyone else. The Jews say there is something wrong with everyone else, a point of view they encapsulate in the word "antisemitism". And "everyone else" has uncritically accepted this manifestly absurd argument." Except it is true: after all Christianity practiced usury: http://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/ir/bitstream/1840.16/10552/1/etd.pdfSo yes Christianity lied.

I started to read that 189 pages of a thesis delivered at an American university to which you linked. It begins with the dubious statement that the author will seek to disprove the contention that "all Jews" were involved during the Middle Ages (using England as the prime example) in Usury. Firstly, no one I know when discussing Jews has ever contended that "all Jews" were involved in money-lending; it was a specific business/profession, a guild in some cases and there were definite rules. Obviously, it was restricted to a certain number of people operating in that capacity. (As the author states early on, Jews did hold a significant percentage of loans contracted via money-lending (about 27% approx). Since I haven't read the entire 189 pages I don't know if this author mentions the practice which English kings (starting with King John) undertook, whereby all loans were to be listed at a central royal department (Exchequer) and that the Monarch granted to himself the right to buy up these loans from moneylenders (from whom he usually borrowed the necessary funds!) in order to obtain the assets used to secure these loans (usually in the form of land holdings). In this manner, the English Monarchy became entwined with the moneylenders to the point of protecting them and granting them special privileges which eventually incurred the wrath of the English Barons, leading to Magna Carta with its provisions against both Jews AND ANYONE ELSE attempting to obtain settlement of loans which had delved on the heirs of the original party who had taken out the loan. So, of course, Jews were not alone in this practice, but their interest rates were horrendous, well beyond any comparable interest rate today and their effect was disastrous for the English people.

Furthermore, English Kings after King John sought to stop the Jews from depending upon money-lending as a prime source of income for their community by passing laws which granted them rights to enter into other professions (farming, merchants, military etc) but Jews continued the money lending to the point that the English King was faced with further revolts from the English people and this was the cause of the banishment in 1290. Re Usury itself: the Old Testament (which is not the prime text of Judaism, it is the Talmud which has that place) states that Usuary is a sin worse than Sodomy; the Talmud permits it and especially when dealing with non-Jews, the only caveat being that this usury should not be so excessive as to incur hostility from the gentiles (not restricted to Christians but obviously this is the group of people with whom Jews have had the greatest degree of social intercourse since Christ and Christianity as the main religion of the civilised Western world). This caveat underlines the lack of moral objectivity in judaism; one may do what the earlier precepts of the ideology deemed completely unacceptable, so long as one doesn't arouse notice/anger/retribution from the victim(s).

If you believe I have misunderstood that author's thesis, then please list its salient points yourself (I presume you have read that thesis?)